Trump directs military to target drug cartels

Status
Not open for further replies.
Grey Havoc

Grey Havoc

ACCESS: USAP
Joined
9 October 2009
Messages
24,500
Reaction score
18,175
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/08/us/trump-military-drug-cartels.html
President Trump has secretly signed a directive to the Pentagon to begin using military force against certain Latin American drug cartels that his administration has deemed terrorist organizations, according to people familiar with the matter.

The decision to bring the American military into the fight is the most aggressive step so far in the administration’s escalating campaign against the cartels. It signals Mr. Trump’s continued willingness to use military forces to carry out what has primarily been considered a law enforcement responsibility to curb the flow of fentanyl and other illegal drugs.

The order provides an official basis for the possibility of direct military operations at sea and on foreign soil against cartels.

U.S. military officials have started drawing up options for how the military could go after the groups, the people familiar with the conversations said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive internal deliberations.
Click to expand...

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-directs-pentagon-prepare-military-options-drug-cartels/
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c07pdel9vyjo
 
Grey Havoc said:
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/08/us/trump-military-drug-cartels.html

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-directs-pentagon-prepare-military-options-drug-cartels/
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c07pdel9vyjo
Click to expand...
Well, it's no longer a secret. The US has for decades had the technical means necessary to attack the cartels with stealth technology, infrared sensors and special bombs that leave no visible traces, without risking the life of a single soldier, or a single pilot, with total impunity and absolute anonymity. The big question is whether the political will to do so is there or is it simply a false threat to force trade deals. We live in interesting times... will this be the end of sanctuaries?
 
I agree that turning off the demand is the prime methodology but we cannot legislate for stoopid. Perhaps hit both ends of the seesaw?
 
Foo Fighter said:
I agree that turning off the demand is the prime methodology but we cannot legislate for stoopid. Perhaps hit both ends of the seesaw?
Click to expand...
It seems that the cycles are changing. If a guy launches rockets at your country from a shrine, you finally have permission to remove the shrine, if a guy makes poison in another country to kill the people of your country, the shrine is removed. That is going to irritate the international organizations that had created this system since 1973.
 
Justo Miranda said:
It seems that the cycles are changing. If a guy launches rockets at your country from a shrine, you finally have permission to remove the shrine, if a guy makes poison in another country to kill the people of your country, the shrine is removed. That is going to irritate the international organizations that had created this system since 1973.
Click to expand...

Almost all illegal firearms in Canada come in via the United States. More fentanyl comes into Canada from the U.S. than goes from Canada into the U.S.

Assuming this is the case: Does this mean that the RCMP and CAF could organise hit squads to target suspected criminals in the United States without trial? Can we conduct drone strikes on U.S. soil?

I raise this because I think it is worth thinking through the implications "when the shoe is on the other foot" as the expression goes.

I get the sense that a lot of Americans never stop to think about how certain policies will be experienced by those outside of their borders.
 
Avimimus said:
Almost all illegal firearms in Canada come in via the United States. More fentanyl comes into Canada from the U.S. than goes from Canada into the U.S.

Assuming this is the case: Does this mean that the RCMP and CAF could organise hit squads to target suspected criminals in the United States without trial? Can we conduct drone strikes on U.S. soil?

I raise this because I think it is worth thinking through the implications "when the shoe is on the other foot" as the expression goes.

I get the sense that a lot of Americans never stop to think about how certain policies will be experienced by those outside of their borders.
Click to expand...
You are correct of course, fry the bar tenders. Extra crispy and wait for the orange response.
 
Covert operations have been conducted by many countries. This is nothing new. However, revealing "secrets" in the press is bad form. The news media in the United States is highly dysfunctional.

As an American, I am aware of a number of operations conducted by the CIA during the Cold War.
 
Justo Miranda said:
Well, it's no longer a secret. The US has for decades had the technical means necessary to attack the cartels with stealth technology, infrared sensors and special bombs that leave no visible traces, without risking the life of a single soldier, or a single pilot, with total impunity and absolute anonymity.
Click to expand...
you have been watching too many movies and can't separate fact from fiction
 
Byeman said:
not really

https://www.dea.gov/sites/default/f...8-20 Fentanyl Flow in the United States_0.pdf
Click to expand...

That document doesn't estimate how much fentanyl pass from Canada to the United States. It also does not even consider fentanyl passing from the United States into Canada (i.e. going the other way). It is only concerned with effects on the U.S. - not effects elsewhere.

How can one say that more fentanyl pass from Canada to the United States than goes from the United States to Canada if you don't measure how much fentanyl goes either way?
 
Avimimus said:
Assuming this is the case: Does this mean that the RCMP and CAF could organise hit squads to target suspected criminals in the United States without trial? Can we conduct drone strikes on U.S. soil?
Click to expand...

Large cities legalizing drugs doesn’t help. And lately the policies given to law enforcement agencies are just bad, cops will face pressure from city councils. The NYPD CRT (Communtiy Response Team, basically a pro-active anti crime unit) was arguably the only effective response to increasing crime in NYC, now the future mayor wants to disband the CRT and defund even more the NYPD, which already lacks training and resources. And this trend is happening in all major cities in the U.S.

And no trials? BLM and similar groups will riot.
 
DWG said:
Someone's been reading again Clear and Present Danger again. And not paying attention to the fallout losing the incumbent president the election.
Click to expand...

Anyone know if has been on any of the tv/cable channels over the last few days, could also give some incite :cool:

Regards,
 
ComradeVortex said:
Large cities legalizing drugs doesn’t help. And lately the policies given to law enforcement agencies are just bad, cops will face pressure from city councils. The NYPD CRT (Communtiy Response Team, basically a pro-active anti crime unit) was arguably the only effective response to increasing crime in NYC, now the future mayor wants to disband the CRT and defund even more the NYPD, which already lacks training and resources. And this trend is happening in all major cities in the U.S.
Click to expand...
That's what you got when you don't have centralized state-controlled police system, instead relying on weird pseudo-militia system of frontier era.
 
Dilandu said:
That's what you got when you don't have centralized state-controlled police system, instead relying on weird pseudo-militia system of frontier era.
Click to expand...
I don’t think issue is not really towards the police agencies itself, but it’s all in the politics of city and state. The State of Washington for example due to its politics wouldn’t allow LEOs to engage in vehicular pursuits unless there was proof that suspects were involved in DUI / violent felonies. The police departments were pretty upset that they had to follow this rule.
Needless to say, crime had a massive spike since that and the State of WA saw how bad of a decision it was, and made pursuits policies more free again up to the LE agency. It’s all in the higher ups and politicians.

A central nation-wide single police agency would be hell, considering the most libertarians I see on social media keep calling Trump a fascist, would also then call the police fascist (it’s already happening). In a country like the US it would not be possible.

And you also have to deal with the new generations having a complete disrespect of law enforcement..
 
Justo Miranda said:
Well, it's no longer a secret. The US has for decades had the technical means necessary to attack the cartels with stealth technology, infrared sensors and special bombs that leave no visible traces, without risking the life of a single soldier, or a single pilot, with total impunity and absolute anonymity. The big question is whether the political will to do so is there or is it simply a false threat to force trade deals. We live in interesting times... will this be the end of sanctuaries?
Click to expand...

Special bombs that leave no traces?

Do tell.
 
ComradeVortex said:
I don’t think issue is not really towards the police agencies itself, but it’s all in the politics of city and state
Click to expand...
Partially it is. The police should not be part of local election process & should not be subjected to momentary whims of the politicians, eager to get more votes.

ComradeVortex said:
A central nation-wide single police agency would be hell, considering the most libertarians I see on social media keep calling Trump a fascist, would also then call the police fascist (it’s already happening). In a country like the US it would not be possible.
Click to expand...
With all respect, but I constantly see in Facebook and X how BOTH Republicans and Democrats are moaning about police being oppressive, violating constitutional rights, serving only the elite, ect.,ect., ect. So what exactly are you gonna lose?
 
Avimimus said:
Almost all illegal firearms in Canada come in via the United States. More fentanyl comes into Canada from the U.S. than goes from Canada into the U.S.

Assuming this is the case: Does this mean that the RCMP and CAF could organise hit squads to target suspected criminals in the United States without trial? Can we conduct drone strikes on U.S. soil?

I raise this because I think it is worth thinking through the implications "when the shoe is on the other foot" as the expression goes.
Click to expand...
What a disingenuous example. The US doesnt sit and do nothing about it. The US government also isnt half taken over by politicians on cartel money is it? Nor is the US the source of those drugs either. Mexico and many more countries south of the border really dont care to fix these problems. El Salvador is an example of a country that wants to fix their problems - controversy or not.

Avimimus said:
I get the sense that a lot of Americans never stop to think about how certain policies will be experienced by those outside of their borders.
Click to expand...
You're right - nothing here makes military action okay, but quite frankly, the lived experience of those subject to these actions certainly wasnt a concern for anybody since the man knew war. Not caring about how other people outside of your country experiences crrtain things isnt particular to the US. Morals and human suffering didnt stop the Soviets going into Afghanistan. Morals and human suffering didnt stop China from attacking Vietnam or India. Human suffering certainly didnt stop anybody from having a party in Syria in the last 10 years. Morals and suffering didnt stop Azerbaijan nor did it stop India from attacking pakistan. Morals certainly didnt stop 20 years of GWOT either. You think people in Russia cared about how people perceived them when they attacked Ukraine?

The only thing that matters, inevitably, is how the actor chooses to justify its actions and how the opposing actor chooses to capitalize on this to chip away at the opponents credibility. Absolutely no one on either side gives a shilling about the experience of it.

Thats not to say this military action thing isnt fucking dumb. It is. Its just not for the reason and reasoning you describe. To pretend that its only american people who do not care about those on the receiving end is just, again a partial judgement to make.
 
Last edited:
Dilandu said:
Well, at least we build there more infrastructure than anyone before us or after us. Waterworks, powerplants, hospitals, schools...
Click to expand...
Sure, but it didn't stop the 1 - 3 million people from having to experience or die from it either did it?

I dont believe in any rosy happy story of "oh we built xyz for you to have a better life" be it the US, the Soviets or China. There's a price to be paid for everything. That price might not always be clear to the civilian, but its still paid. The lived experience factors into things only in order to win over, to rule over or to pacify a target population. And inevitably, when one attempts this, their enemy will try to subvert this. In this struggle, the things you can give to a target population hardly counts as some kind of donation to their wellbeing - or at least its never purely so.

So when people start talking about what's right, wrong, morally okay and not okay in geopolitics especially between adversaries, I always find it absurd because once you start to draw in those things as a metric to measure policy, you run contradictions that can be summed up in nothing but biases introduced because everyone wants to believe they are rhe good side. These are not domestic politics where justice and morality absolutely matter.

I prefer to think of it only in terms of cost and benefit. And under that lense, I do not deny that this military action he proposes is just stupid waste of tax dollars. The true tragedy of trump isnt that his goals are all bad. Its that he chooses the absolute dumbest ways to go about these goals. This military action is one of them.
 
Last edited:
Grey Havoc said:
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/08/us/trump-military-drug-cartels.html

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-directs-pentagon-prepare-military-options-drug-cartels/
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c07pdel9vyjo
Click to expand...

I have Family and friends in Mexico.

I will tell you my honest opinion.

Americans do drugs because their culture promotes it
1754981536192.png

raw model rock musicians

and Fentanyl was a prescription Drug.

why the Americans blame Mexico? simple they always hide there are drug dealers in the USA, the Drug dealers are just an excuse to intervene.

Mexican cartels recruiting US military personnel: Former police officer reveals​


In the United States, they reveal how the cartels operate; they recruit military personnel, both retired and active, according to a former police officer. They all supply the Mexican cartels
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8WrhkvJ9EMY



View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7NkdftfSVs

American Cartels: The Enemy Is Within | Interview with Jesús Esquivel​


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijadMeO2dZs

American Cartels: The Criminal Network in the U.S. That No One Wants to See | MVS News​

In an interview with Luis Cárdenas for MVS Noticias, journalist Jesús Esquivel reveals the existence and operation of powerful drug cartels in the United States: criminal structures made up of gangs, motorcycle clubs, and American citizens who traffic fentanyl, launder money in banks, and bribe federal authorities. Using previously unpublished data and testimony from the DEA, Esquivel details how these organizations have grown with institutional complicity, while exclusively criminalizing Mexican cartels. His book, "Los Cárteles Gringos," exposes this network of impunity, racism, and multi-million-dollar business that few dare to denounce
 
Last edited:
ComradeVortex said:
I don’t think issue is not really towards the police agencies itself, but it’s all in the politics of city and state. The State of Washington for example due to its politics wouldn’t allow LEOs to engage in vehicular pursuits unless there was proof that suspects were involved in DUI / violent felonies. The police departments were pretty upset that they had to follow this rule.
Needless to say, crime had a massive spike since that and the State of WA saw how bad of a decision it was, and made pursuits policies more free again up to the LE agency. It’s all in the higher ups and politicians.

A central nation-wide single police agency would be hell, considering the most libertarians I see on social media keep calling Trump a fascist, would also then call the police fascist (it’s already happening). In a country like the US it would not be possible.

And you also have to deal with the new generations having a complete disrespect of law enforcement..
Click to expand...
American soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines participate in drug trafficking in the US as well as in arms trafficking to Mexico, reveals the book The Fort Bragg Cartel by Seth Harp, a veteran of the Iraq War and journalist, who unravels an extensive network of drug trafficking and corruption that is embedded in the security corporations of the American Union.
US police and soldiers control drug trafficking, investigation reveals
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3G6QCGLZZk


Trump has the brassier policy impress from outside but hides the more important
 
Reddington777 said:
What a disingenuous example. The US doesnt sit and do nothing about it.
Click to expand...

It isn't though. The U.S. has failed to stem the flow of illegal firearms.

For that matter, if you were able to take control of your drug problem, then you wouldn't be talking about invading Mexico. It is worth noting that those cartels are primarily funded by U.S. buyers.

Reddington777 said:
You're right - nothing here makes military action okay, but quite frankly, the lived experience of those subject to these actions certainly wasnt a concern for anybody since the man knew war. Not caring about how other people outside of your country experiences crrtain things isnt particular to the US. Morals and human suffering didnt stop the Soviets going into Afghanistan. Morals and human suffering didnt stop China from attacking Vietnam or India. Human suffering certainly didnt stop anybody from having a party in Syria in the last 10 years. Morals and suffering didnt stop Azerbaijan nor did it stop India from attacking pakistan. Morals certainly didnt stop 20 years of GWOT either. You think people in Russia cared about how people perceived them when they attacked Ukraine?

The only thing that matters, inevitably, is how the actor chooses to justify its actions and how the opposing actor chooses to capitalize on this to chip away at the opponents credibility. Absolutely no one on either side gives a shilling about the experience of it.

Thats not to say this military action thing isnt fucking dumb. It is. Its just not for the reason and reasoning you describe. To pretend that its only american people who do not care about those on the receiving end is just, again a partial judgement to make.
Click to expand...

If you ever live in one of the smaller countries, you'll find that they can't afford to think like that - they have to consider their allies interests, cultivate trade partners, and mutual defence. Only great powers can afford to think and act like you describe.

When you've found that you've alienated all of your allies and stand alone against the world - remember my words.
 
DWG said:
Someone's been reading again Clear and Present Danger again. And not paying attention to the fallout losing the incumbent president the election.
Click to expand...
It's not just 'Clear and Present Danger' if you check the 'Fictional Warships' thread you will find that it was quite a popular plot idea back in the late 1980s/early 1990s.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom